Dec 7, 2012 7:00pm EST
. federal law signed into law by president clinton in 1996. it says if a person is legally married in a state, the federal government can't recognize those marriages. that's where you talked about federal benefits heterosexual couples get and same sex couples do not. the prop 8 thing is bigger. while potentially it's confined to the state of california only, the question it out there having given the right to gay marriage could the state then take it away through proposition 8 passed by a majority of the vote nurse 2008. having taken that case, the court could get to the bedrock issue. can any state refuse to let same sex couples get married under the federal constitution. it could potentially be narrow or very far. >> pete, as i understand it, let me ask you. this one of these things, maybe the driving one, is defense of marriage act was about paying the estate act. where one of the two people said she didn't have to pay the estate tax because a married couple wouldn't have to. >> reporter: this is a case from new york. a woman named edie windsor who married her partner in canada.
Dec 5, 2012 4:00am EST
these generalities. they'll close loopholes. it's a simple question, as president clinton said, of arithmetic. arithmetic. you can't get from here to there unless you raise the rates. >> so guys, that's where we are as of this morning, and now what everyone's waiting for is which side will make a concrete proposal here that actually includes some concessions? back to you. >> joining us from washington, d.c., jake sherman, congressional reporter for politico. who is going to make some honest concessions first? >> what eamon said is absolutely right. this comes down to one thing, whether republicans are willing to raise marginal income tax rates on americans. they're saying they're willing to raise revenue, but president obama has one criteria in this debate and that's raising income rates on all americans. right now, the sides are in their two corners on this and nobody is moving. so we're really only a couple weeks out and there's this huge gap, and eamon was right in another aspect. there is this brush fire of conservative lawmakers who don't want to raise revenue at all. so this is a huge p
Dec 5, 2012 6:00am EST
for progressives, just to do it. to go back to the clinton era rates. you get rid of three quarters of the deficit just on tax increases at that point. >> and he says you get defense cuts. >> you can't get defense cuts any other way. and he's not the only one. there's a lot of people on the left and there's quite a few people on the right. i'm glad you're optimistic and a lot of ceos and guys in your position -- if you run a company, you don't need consumers petrified and business people petrified. this is the last thing we need if you run a company. i understand you have a horse in the game. >> but you also have the double trigger. if you go over the cliff, we've got the debt ceiling fight right afterwards. it's not like that's six months down the line. that's in if first month, six weeks of the new year. >> the other thing, depending on where you stand, the idea that we just get rid of congressional approval of the debt ceiling at all, which is that ludicrous proposal that was in the president's plan. that's not -- and would you really want that? would you really want not having any more oversig